Music Listening Licensing Fees

[piet pompies]

There is a small neighborhood pub we like to visit in BKK. Last week a Thai man walks in, asks for music by "Bird" this is put on, the man then goes to the toilet, a minute later the police come in. The man comes back, showeing a card saying he works for Grammy and the pub has no license to play the music.

The CD player and the CD is take to police atation and the man from Grammy demands 30,000 Baht to "avoid prosecution" and drop the case. This fee is negotiated down to 20,000 Baht. The Grammy fellow says he has to go and hit the next bar! The police issues a receipt for 20K. The Grammy guy says the annual feel to play is about 3,000 Baht, but can be discounted.

The bar manager pays the 20K and the player is back in the bar.

Is this for real?? How on earth can licensing fees and penalties to a big company get discounted?

I get the idea there are some bar owners on this site, do you have the same experience?

[baht&sold]

If this is as stated, something's not quite right... A small bar apparently busted by a Grammy undercover, a supposed yearly fee of 3000 baht becomes a settlement of 30,000 negotiated to 20,000, supposedly police receipts were given, then the alleged mystery Grammy man has to go 'hit' the next bar???

Edited October 27, 2005 by baht&sold

[womble]

This is true, my friend has a bar and recieved a letter with the application to pay the 3000 baht to grammy. He didn't pay it as he doesn't play any grammy music in his bar, no Thai music at all.

So this is eigher Grammy showing bar owners, karoke owners etc they have to pay 3000 baht or else face a fine.

On the other hand it could be a scam by someone who knows of the 3000 baht a year annual royalties fee.

Wouldn't it be funny if all bars and Karaoke's refused to play Grammy Music because of the 3000 baht fee.

[Iain]

There is a small neighborhood pub we like to visit in BKK. Last week a Thai man walks in, asks for music by "Bird" this is put on, the man then goes to the toilet, a minute later the police come in. The man comes back, showeing a card saying he works for Grammy and the pub has no license to play the music.

The CD player and the CD is take to police atation and the man from Grammy demands 30,000 Baht to "avoid prosecution" and drop the case. This fee is negotiated down to 20,000 Baht. The Grammy fellow says he has to go and hit the next bar! The police issues a receipt for 20K. The Grammy guy says the annual feel to play is about 3,000 Baht, but can be discounted.

The bar manager pays the 20K and the player is back in the bar.

Is this for real?? How on earth can licensing fees and penalties to a big company get discounted?

I get the idea there are some bar owners on this site, do you have the same experience?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I bet that 20K didn't go to the Grammy's pocket.

[steveromagnino]

Well technically there is a charge for playing music in a public place; be it Grammy, RS or others.

For instance, the music you hear in shopping malls? There is an organisation, JCL or JLI or something that comes around and collects royalties for the musicians whose performances are being played; it is based on a charge per sq. m. If I recall correctly, that is the whole group of the large recording companies and they somehow share it out.

I suspect it is simply that Grammy are being a little more aggressive at the moment about it (what with earnings and so on being at stake) than RS or the others, at the moment. Theoretically all the karaoke machines are supposed to pay as well.

When we consider that the artists and music company have indeed spent the time making the stuff; well if a place wants to play it as entertainment then they shouldn't get a free ride.

But then again, I don't download illegal music so I am an honest guy (well, for as long as this stupid &*(king firewall at work stops me from using peer share networks :-)

[TAWP]

It's exactly like this in many countries. Or...all countries where the music-industry has money. A lot of money and favourable laws goes hand in hand.

[bkkexplorer]

Not saying I'm an expert on the subject but I would have thought that some sort of entertainment license that allows you to play 'music' would cover ALL record companies. Surely as a owner of a pub/ bar you can't be expected to source out different record companies to give them their cut.

By the sounds of it, looks like only the thai companies are benefiting from this rule.?

[simon43]

Speaking from 1st-hand kowledge, bars have to pay a licence to play music. That licence is usually levied every 3 months. Furthermore, bars have to pay not just one licence but many! So we pay Grammy and several other record companies, as well as a different licence for playing Thai music and one for Western music.... That's a lot of licences!! And the record companies do make surprise visits to check if you have the correct licence to play the music. If not, your equipment is immediately confiscated

Simon

[Rags]

Speaking from 1st-hand kowledge, bars have to pay a licence to play music.  That licence is usually levied every 3 months.  Furthermore, bars have to pay not just one licence but many!  So we pay Grammy and several other record companies, as well as a different licence for playing Thai music and one for Western music.... That's a lot of licences!!  And the record companies do make surprise visits to check if you have the correct licence to play the music.  If not, your equipment is immediately confiscated

Simon

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bizarre. Sounds like a suitably unworkable Thai arrangement....no thought of using a single collection agency such as the Performing Rights Society to collect on behalf of all local copyright holders

Rags